alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
----

|   | 1. | The                Company's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December                31,                2005, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32 (the                "Annual                Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or                Section                15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as                amended; |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | The                information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all                material respects, the financial condition and results of operations                of                the Company. |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/                  Paul O. Koether                  |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Paul                  O. Koether                      |
| Chairman                  and Chief Executive Officer |
|                                                  |   |
|                                                  |   |
|                                                  |   |
| /s/                  Sue Ann Merrill                  |   |
| Sue                  Ann Merrill                      |
| Chief                  Financial Officer,             |
| Treasurer                  and Secretary              |

----
<PAGE>

OCTOBER 3, 2003                                                 EXHIBIT 10(d-1)

        AMENDMENT TO JOHN H LOWRY EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT WITH CATUITY INC.
                              DATED APRIL 18, 2000

The Employment Agreement of John H Lowry dated April 18, 2000 with Catuity Inc.
("Agreement") is hereby amended, effective January 1, 2003 as follows. All terms
and conditions in the Employment Agreement that have not been amended as part of
this Amendment shall remain in full force and effect.

Section 2 (a) Salary - Base salary is $160,000 per year effective January 1,
2003.

Section 2 (b) Cash Performance Bonus - A performance bonus for the calendar year
2003 will be earned based on the Company achieving certain Net Revenue (NR) and
Net Income Before Extraordinary Items and Non-Cash Stock Compensation Expense
(NI) objectives as described below:

NI = Net income before non-cash stock compensation and extraordinary items less
the amount, if any, approved by the Board for M&A investigation. The net income
budget before non-cash stock compensation and extraordinary items for 2003 is
the amount approved by the Board at its meeting of 1/28/03 ($ 819,000, which
includes other income).

NR = Net revenue budget for 2003 as approved by the Board at its meeting of
1/28/03 ($ 6,919,000), less the deferred revenue balance as of 12/31/02, as
indicated in the audited Balance Sheet at 12/31/02.

If NR is below budget and NI is less than 90% of budget, no bonus is earned.

If NR is at least equal to budget and NI is between 90% and 99.9% of budget, 50%
of the targeted bonus is earned.

If NR and NI are between 100% and 110% of budget, 100% of the targeted bonus is
earned.

If NR and NI are between 110.1% and 120% of budget, 125% of the targeted bonus
is earned.

If NR and NI are greater than 120% of budget, 150% of the targeted bonus is
earned.

The targeted bonus for 2003, at 100% achievement, is $20,000. If one of the
measurement criteria (NR or NI) is in one of the above ranges and the other is
in a different range, the bonus shall be determined at the lower of the two
ranges.

Section 2 (c) Stock Option Grant - 50,000 unvested options held as of January 1,
2003 that were awarded on May 1, 2000, will be voluntarily surrendered.
Effective on the date that this Amendment is signed, 25,000 options will be
awarded that expire December 31, 2005, at a grant price of $3.84 (50% of the
exercise price of the surrendered options), and which vest immediately. In the
event Mr. Lowry voluntarily resigns, retires, or his employment with Catuity is
terminated by the Company (as defined in Section 3 of the Agreement) during the
term of this Amendment, all vested options held as of the termination date will
expire six (6) months following the date of termination. If Mr. Lowry's
employment terminates due to death or incapacity due to disability (as defined
in Section 3 (c) of the Agreement) during the term of this Amendment, his vested
options will expire one (1) year from the date of termination. Any unvested
options held as of the date of termination expire immediately without regard to
the reason for termination.
#### Luther TYRE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 28302.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 2, 1956.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

. Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

PER CURIAM.

The offense is driving while intoxicated; the punishment, 3 days in jail and a-fine of $50.

The record on appeal contains no statement of facts or bills of exception. All’ proceedings appeals to be regular and nothing is presented for review. The judgment is affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

UNDER

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

PACIFIC MERCANTILE BANCORP

Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q

for the quarter ended March 31, 2010

The undersigned, who is the Chief Executive Officer of Pacific Mercantile Bancorp (the Company), hereby certifies that
(i) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010, as filed by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Quarterly Report), to which this Certification is an Exhibit, fully complies
with the applicable requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and (ii) the information contained in this Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.



|                   |  |  |  |  |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
|------------------ |  |  |  |  |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: May 11, 2010 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/  RAYMOND E.
DELLERBA                                                                                                                                                                                                   
|                   |  |  |  |  |  | Raymond E. Dellerba,
President and Chief Executive Officer                                                                                                                                                                 
|                   |  |  | 
|                   |  |  |  |  |  | A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
**EXHIBIT 32**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report ofToo Late Financial Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Anthony N. DeMint, President and Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

|   | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|   | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

/s/ Anthony N. DeMint                                    

Anthony N. DeMint

President and Chief Accounting Officer

August 3, 2006
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

WILLIAM HERNANDEZ AKA SAMUEL LOPEZ,

Petitioner

v.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 85 EM 2014

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 21 st day of August, 2014, the Application for Leave to File

Original Process is GRANTED , and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus is DENIED

.
#### Johnnie MOSLEY, Jr., Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 28447.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 27, 1956.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

Dan Walton, Dist. Atty., Eugene Brady, Thomas D. White, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, and Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

PER CURIAM.

The offense is felony theft; the punishment, 3 years.

The record on appeal contains no statement of facts or bills of exception. All proceedings appear to be regular, and nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed, and no motion for rehearing will be entertained in this case.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                            9
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         13,866
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         1,672
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               7,820
<TRADING-ASSETS>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    31,810
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         4,150
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           4,106
<LOANS>                                        249,148
<ALLOWANCE>                                    3,739
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 326,365
<DEPOSITS>                                     269,799
<SHORT-TERM>                                   10,058
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            8,958
<LONG-TERM>                                    7,747
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       1,841
<OTHER-SE>                                     27,962
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 326,365
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                15,789
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              1,178
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               369
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               17,336
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             7,443
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             8,135
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          9,201
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  185
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                8,611
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                4,236
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     4,236
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   2,652
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  1.58
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                 4.61
<LOANS-NON>                                    2,796
<LOANS-PAST>                                   55
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               1,371
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  148
<RECOVERIES>                                   5
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              3,739
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           3,739
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                            0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        3,739
        

</TABLE>
Early Start Late Finish

Phase 1A

Tilt up walls 7/6/2010 9/16/2010

Roofing 8/11/2010 10/15/2010

Acid mist scrubber 9/16/2010 12/20/2010

Baghouses 10/28/2010 12/13/2010

Torits 10/28/2010 12/17/2010

Hygiene Stack 10/28/2010 12/17/2010

SO2 Scrubber 10/28/2010 12/13/2010

Process Stack 10/28/2010 12/20/2010

Afterburner 8/31/2010 11/29/2010

Reverb Furnace 10/14/2010 11/29/2010

Dryer system 10/14/2010 12/15/2010

Holding Kettles 10/14/2010 12/30/2010

Launch Phase 1A 1/20/2011 2/16/2011

Phase 1B

Tilt up walls 3/15/2011 4/25/2011

Roofing 4/13/2011 5/20/2011

Blast Furnace 5/5/2011 5/24/2011

Refining Kettles (4) 5/11/2011 5/26/2011

Launch Phase 1B 8/16/2011 8/29/2011

Phase 1C

Tilt up walls 10/19/2011 10/25/2011

Roofing 11/16/2011 1/19/2012

Refining Kettles (2) 12/1/2011 12/20/2011

Launch Phase 1C 2/10/2012 3/23/2012

Phase 2

EnviroFocus Construction Milestones

This phase will replace the existing battery breaking, water treatment plant, 

afterburner, containment room, baghouses, torit systems as well as add the 

new Reverb furnace, dryer, 2-holding kettles and various site improvements. 

The two systems will run concurrently while the new systems are started up 

and tested.

This phase will include the blast furnace improvements, installation of 4 

refining kettles. The blast and kettles will be linked to the new baghouses and 

torit systems.

This phase will include the final 2 refining kettles, lead lab and control rooms.

This phase will include the build out of the finished goods, spare parts, 

maintenance, mobile equipment and material transfer room structures.
Tilt up walls 11/10/2011 12/15/2011

Roofing 12/16/2011 3/2/2012

Launch Phase 2 3/12/2012 3/23/2012

This is the current construction schedule. Please note that the dates 

listed are subject to change for many given reasons at any given time.
#### The State, ex rel. Longano, *v.*Industrial Commission of Ohio.

(No. 27404

Decided March 22, 1939.)

*166
      *Mr. G. W. Elliott*and *Messrs. Davies, Hoover S Beall,*for relator.

*Mr. Thomas J. Herbert,*attorney general, and *Mr. E. P. Felker,*for respondent.

Zimmerman, J.

The decision in this case turns on whether Section 1465-90, General Code, as amended in 1937, authorizing a rehearing upon discontinuance of compensation, applies, or whether such section in its previous form is controlling.

Counsel for the relator frankly concede that if Section 1465-90, General Code, as in force until July 3, 1937, is applicable, the relator has no standing in court, under the decisions in *State, ex rel. Depalo,*v. *Industrial Commission,*128 Ohio St., 410, 191 N. E., 691, and *Noggle*v. *Industrial Commission,*129 Ohio St., 495, 196 N. E., 377, holding that the right of a claimant to continue to draw compensation on account of an injury is a matter exclusively within the determination and jurisdiction of the Industrial Commission.

This court has held that the filing of an application for compensation with the Industrial Commission is a proceeding within the terms of Section 26, General Code, governed thereafter in all respects by the statutes in force when the claim was originally filed. *Industrial Commission*v. *Vail,*110 Ohio St., 304, 143 N. E., 716; *State, ex rel. Slaughter,*v. *Industrial Commission,*132 Ohio St., 537, 541, 9 N. E. (2d), 505, 507; 42 Ohio Jurisprudence, 682, Section 94.

*167Section 26, General Code, states that no amendment of a statute shall affect a proceeding existing at the time of the amendment, unless otherwise expressly provided in the amending act.

A perusal of Section 1465-90, General Code, as most recently amended, fails to disclose any express language giving it a retroactive operation.

Consequently, the conclusion seems inescapable that the relator must abide by Section 1465-90, General Code, as it existed when he filed his claim for compensation, and, therefore, under the former decisions of this court, he cannot successfully demand a writ of mandamus to compel a rehearing by the Industrial Commission.

We find ourselves in disagreement with counsel for the relator that the cases of *State, ex rel. Construction Co.,*v. *Rabbitts,*46 Ohio St., 178, 19 N. E., 437, and *State, ex rel. Slaughter,*v. *Industrial Commission, supra,*uphold their contention that Section 1465-90, General Code, as presently in force, is invocable to support the relator’s action.

The demurrer to the petition is sustained and, since this ruling clearly determines the controversy, the writ is denied.

*Demurrer to petition sustained and writ denied.*

Weygandt, C. J., Day, Williams, Myers, Matthias and Hart, JJ., concur.
Exhibit No. 15 

 

Awareness Letter from Independent Accountants 

 

October 30, 2003 

 

Armstrong Holdings, Inc. 

Lancaster, Pennsylvania 

 

Re: Registration Statement No. 333-74501; 33-91890; 33-18996; 33-18997; 33-65768; 333-79093; 333-43872 

 

With respect to the subject registration statements, we acknowledge our awareness of the usetherein of our report dated October 30, 2003 related to our review of interim financial information of Armstrong Holdings, Inc. 

 

Pursuant to Rule 436 under the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Act”), such report is not considered part of a registration statement prepared or certified by anaccountant, or a report prepared or certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of the Act. 

 

/s/ KPMG LLP 

 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
#### Robert Charles FORD, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 37452.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 16, 1964.

W. S. Foster, Waco, for appellant.

Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

McDonald, judge.

The offense is operating a motor vehicle without a taillight; the punishment, a fine of $23.00.

Appellant’s’ conviction resulted from a trial de novo, before a jury, in the County Court at Law of McLennan County; after an appeal from a conviction in Justice of the Peace Court, Precinct No. 1 of Mc-Lennan County.

This Court’s jurisdiction in appeals in causes originating in the justice court is limited to convictions where the fine assessed in the county court exceeds $100.00. See Art. 53, Vernon’s Ann.C.C. P.; Trull v. State, 169 Tex.Cr.R. 357, 334 S.W.2d 180; Williams v. State, 170 Tex.Cr.R. 121, 339 S.W.2d 63; Payne v. State, 170 Tex.Cr.R. 347, 342 S.W.2d 580 and Hoover v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 355 S.W.2d 527.

The appeal is dismissed.
<PAGE>

                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.10.2

                                 March 10, 2003

Matthew Murphy
Nanosys Incorporated
2625 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA 94304

Re: Exclusive Patent License Agreement - Amendment Two

Dear Matthew:

This Amendment removes the following M.I.T. Case from Appendix A of the M.I.T. -
Nanosys Inc. Exclusive License Agreement effective September 5, 2002
(Agreement):

        M.I.T. Case No. 9132, "Amime Brightening of CdSe Quantum Dots Overcoated
        with ZnS," by Moungi G. Bawendi and Wing-Keung Woo

Except as specifically modified or amended hereby, the Agreement shall remain in
full force and effect and, as modified or amended, is hereby ratified,
confirmed, and approved. No provision of this Amendment may be modified or
amended except expressly in a writing signed by both parties nor shall any terms
be waived except expressly in a writing signed by the party charged therewith.
This Amendment shall be governed in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth
of Massachusetts.

The Effective Date of this Amendment is March 12, 2003.

Please indicate your acceptance of this Second Amendment by countersigning this
letter and returning it to M.I.T.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology       Nanosys Incorporated

By: /s/ John H. Turner, Jr.                 By: /s/ Matthew Murphy
    ---------------------------------           --------------------------------
Name: John H. Turner, Jr.                   Name: Matthew Murphy
      -------------------------------             ------------------------------
Title: Associate Director                   Title: V.P. Intellectual Property
       Technology Licensing Office                 -----------------------------
       ------------------------------
Date: 10 March 2003                         Date: 3/12/03
      -------------------------------             ------------------------------
#### Edwin D. GREENWELL, Appellant, v. U. B. SELLERS, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

May 31, 1957.

*860Morris B. Borowitz, Louisville, for appellant.

Davis & Mahan, Louisville, for appellee.

CAMMACK, Judge.

Edwin Greenwell acquired an antiquated pistol from which one of the handles was missing. After trying several shops in Okalona, he went into Sellers’ Hardware Store and asked whether gun handles were available. He was directed to the rear of the store, where Elby Tate, an employee of Sellers, managed a salvage department. In the course of inquiring about the gun’s repair, Greenwell obtained some cartridges from Tate and loaded the clip of the automatic. The gun was dropped when it was being handed by Greenwell to Tate and it fired when it struck the floor. Greenwell was wounded in his left arm.

Greenwell brought *an*action for damages against Sellers. On the trial, under an instruction relieving Sellers of liability if Greenwell were negligent, and his negligence contributed to his injury, the jury found in favor of Sellers. From the judgment on that verdict, Greenwell is appealing.

Greenwell’s only argument is that the evidence did not warrant an instruction on contributory negligence. He contends that the evidence shows that either he, or Tate, negligently dropped the gun, but that the record is devoid of evidence showing that the negligence of both operated to cause the injury. The record shows, however, that witnesses in rebuttal testified that Greenwell had stated after the accident, “I don’t know which one dropped the gun,” and that Tate had stated that he didn’t know who was holding the gun when it fell to the floor.' There would certainly be a valid legal inference that the gun was let fall while it was being passed from Greenwell to Tate, and that Green-well released it before Tate had a firm grip. Sellers was entitled to have each theory of the case which supported his contention of nonliability submitted to the jury, including every factual situation inferable from the evidence. Stanley’s Instructions to Juries (2nd Ed., 1957), Sec. 13. We find no error in the instruction toward which complaint is directed.

Judgment affirmed.